New job salary when underpaid at last job

[fluffedup]

Hi everyone, I could do with some advice on this.

I work in a career that's often very well paid. But over the last couple of decades I have chosen jobs, and chosen to stay in jobs, because they fit around the children. When you stay in a job for a long time, in my industry, you often don't get the salary increases that you would have got if you changed jobs. As a result I am underpaid in my current role.

I'm looking for a new job at the moment. The jobs I'm looking at are at least a third more than I'm on at the moment, and I am well qualified to do them. But a recruitment agent I spoke to today said that employers are generally reluctant to offer much more than 10% over what you are getting in your previous job.

So, what would you do?

a) Politely refuse to give your current salary on the grounds that you are underpaid for your skills. Risk coming across as difficult.

b) Get a job, stay a few months, get another, until you catch up with others with your skill set. But possibly put off potential employers because you are now a job-hopper.

c) Tell them your current salary when asked, but refuse to take the job unless you get a decent offer. Probably the best one as my sector seems to have quite a few jobs at the moment.

d) Something else?

It’s crazy how companies are willing to offer market rate for new staff (as they must), but when it comes to existing staff they offer nothing. Then I guess market rate is influenced by companies offering more and more money to attract staff.

I’m in a situation where I’ve been with a company for a number of years and haven’t even had an inflation rise for about the last 5 years, which is effectively a paycut. Now they want to cut everyone’s salaries by 10% because of covid. The kicker is they are “committed to the strategy” and hiring new people at market rate. You can imagine what that does for morale!

I wouldn't advise lying. A friend went to work at a big investment bank on that basis, worked really hard for his three month probation, they got their pound of flesh off him and contacts and let him go at the end of probation as they had found out his actual previous salary right at the outset and just strung him along!

You sound like you've taken the right approach, I hope you get it.

@imonyourway

I wouldn't advise lying. A friend went to work at a big investment bank on that basis, worked really hard for his three month probation, they got their pound of flesh off him and contacts and let him go at the end of probation as they had found out his actual previous salary right at the outset and just strung him along!

You sound like you've taken the right approach, I hope you get it.

If we decided we weren't hiring someone because of dishonesty - we wouldn't give them access to our systems for a day never mind 3 months.

I agree that internal people are often paid less - we are attempting to bridge this gap - turnover in staff is massively disruptive, stressful, risky and expensive. Once someone has looked elsewhere and go a job regardless of what you do to match the new salary - you will probably lose them soon anyway - their loyalty has moved outside the company. We rather give the money directly to our staff than to recruitment costs.

@NewPapaGuinea sadly staff need to vote with their feet.

MN always expects some kind of 'fairness' in life, which is just not how most commercial companies work.

If they can get away with no inflation rises, then they will.
If they can impose cuts then they will.

If we decided we weren't hiring someone because of dishonesty - we wouldn't give them access to our systems for a day never mind 3 months.
This.
I think the best way to present your case is to do a thorough market research with examples if possible at all. Then do a negotiation based on your experience, job expectations and market rate.

[quote topcat2014]@NewPapaGuinea sadly staff need to vote with their feet.

MN always expects some kind of 'fairness' in life, which is just not how most commercial companies work.

If they can get away with no inflation rises, then they will.
If they can impose cuts then they will.[/quote]
In my opinion, making a move every couple of years or so, in the start at least, makes you more in control of your pay check. Company loyalty is a pretty rotten concept IMO.

I increased my salary by 50% a few years ago by moving jobs. I declared what I earned but also added my bonus to the annual salary so slightly fudged it but neither the recruiter nor the hiring manager seemed to care, which was helpful!

If you Google enough you can probably find a guide that tells you what your job pays across the sector. A recruitment agency will also know. So you know what the going rate is. Just remember that it is more common for men to negotiate for a higher salary than women, and it can come as a wake up call for some companies when you ask for more.

If I were earning below what I should be, I'd lie about salary. I've done this before in fact. Employers should pay market rate, they shouldn't decide that they only want to pay a little more than what somebody earned in a previous role. This goes for recruitment consultants too - they have no way of finding out what your actual salary is. So don't tell them.